Full text of "NV 0110837 FALLOUT STUDIES IN OPERATION REDWING"

See other formats

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

Effects of nuclear weapons: the factual truth compiled from declassified reports

• Please see also post linked here, and our summary of the key points in Herman Kahn's much-abused call for credible deterrence.
On Thermonuclear War, linked here.

• Hiroshima's air raid shelters were unoccupied because Japanese Army officers were having breakfast when B29s were detected far away, says Yoshie Oka, the
operator of the Hiroshima air raid sirens on 6 August 1945...

• In 1,881 burns cases in Hiroshima, only 17 (or 0.9 percent) were due to ignited clothing and 15 (or 0.7%) were due to the firestorm flames...

• Dr Harold L. Brode’s new book, Nuclear Weapons in ...

• 800 war migrants drowned on 22 April by EU policy:...

• Photographed fireball shielding by cloud cover in ...

• Nuclear weapons effects "firestorm" and "nuclear w...

• Proved 97.5% survival in completely demolished houses ...

"There has never been a war yet which, if the facts had been put calmly before the ordinary folk, could not have been prevented." -
British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, House of Commons Debate on Foreign Affairs, Hansard, 23 November 1945, column 786
(unfortunately secret Cabinet committees called "democracy" for propaganda purposes have not been quite so successful in preventing
war). Protection is needed against collateral civilian damage and contamination in conventional, chemical and nuclear attack, with
credible low yield clean nuclear deterrence against conventional warfare which, in reality (not science fiction) costs far more lives. Anti
scientific media, who promulgate and exploit terrorism for profit, censor (1) vital, effective civil defense knowledge and (2) effective, safe,
low yield air burst clean weapons like the Mk54 and W79 which deter conventional warfare and escalation, allowing arms negotiations
from a position of strength. This helped end the Cold War in the 1980s. Opposing civil defense and nuclear weapons that really deter
conventional war, is complacent and dangerous.

War and coercion dangers have not stemmed from those who openly attack mainstream mistakes, but from those who camouflage
themselves as freedom fighters to ban such free criticism itself, by making the key facts seem taboo, without even a proper debate, let
alone financing research into unfashionable alternatives. Research and education in non-mainstream alternatives is needed before an
unprejudiced debate, to establish all the basic facts for a real debate. “Wisdom itself cannot flourish, nor even truth be determined,
without the give and take of debate and criticism.” - Robert Oppenheimer (quotation from the H-bomb TV debate hosted by Eleanor
Roosevelt, 12 February 1950).

“Apologies for freedom? 1 can’t handle this! ... Deal from strength or get crushed every time ... Freedom demands liberty everywhere.
I’m thinking, you see, it’s not so easy. But we have to stand up tall and answer freedom’s call!” - Freedom Kids

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

1/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

CATEGORY

Yield (KT) Open

APCs Tanks

(Distances are in meters)

Earth

Shelter

0.1 700 600

1 1200 900

in t9nn non

500 300
800 500
t?5n gnn

Protective factor = ratio of
area of effect in the open ,
area of effect for shelter

Example: for 300 kt, the protective
factor of open foxholes is equal to
(14,000)^/(2,100) 2 = 44.

Open

Foxholes

APCs

Tanks

Earth

Shelter

1.36

1.96

5.44

1.78

2.25

5.76

6.06

6 06

£.55

12. A

24/44

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

600

900

nnn

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

4000

1500

1450

1400

1000

1 7.11

7.61

8.16

16.0

100

8000

1900

1800

1400

1 17.7

19.8

32.7

200

12000

2000

1900

1500

1 36.0

39.9

64.0

300

14000

2100

1950

1600

1 44.4

51.5

76.6

Calculation of the injury-averting protective factors by simple open foxholes and earth shelter
function of weapon yield. Most countermeasures are relatively ineffective against tactical nu
wapons (due to the predominating neutron radiation effect at 0.1 kt yield), but are extremely <
against strategic nuclear weapons with yields of 100, 200 and 300 kt (protective factors of 44 t<

The definition of protective factor used here is the factor by which casualties numbers are reck

Richard P. Feynman, ‘This Unscientific Age’, in The Meaning of It All, Penguin Books, London, 1998, pages 106-9:

‘Now, I say if a man is absolutely honest and wants to protect the populace from the effects of radioactivity, which is what our
scientific friends often say they are trying to do, then he should work on the biggest number, not on the smallest number, and he
should try to point out that the [natural cosmic] radioactivity which is absorbed by living in the city of Denver is so much more
serious [than the smaller doses from nuclear explosions] ... that all the people of Denver ought to move to lower altitudes.'

“If a man reads or hears a criticism of anything in which he has an interest, watch ... if he shows concern with any question except ‘is it
true? ’ he thereby reveals that his own attitude is unscientific. Likewise if... he judges an idea not on its merits but with reference to the
author of it; if he criticizes it as ‘heresy’; if he argues that authority must be right because it is authority ... The path of truth is paved
with critical doubt, and lighted by the spirit of objective enquiry... the majority of people have resented what seems in retrospect to have
been purely matter of fact ... nothing has aided the persistence of falsehood, and the evils resulting from it, more than the unwillingness
of good people to admit the truth ... the tendency continues to be shocked by natural comment, and to hold certain things too ‘sacred’ to
think about. ... How rarely does one meet anyone whose first reaction to anything is to ask: ‘is it true? ’ Yet, unless that is a man ’s
natural reaction, it shows that truth is not uppermost in his mind, and unless it is, true progress is unlikely. ”

- Sir Basil Henry Liddell Hart, Why Don ’t We Learn from History?, PEN Books, 1944; revised edition, Allen and Unwin, 1972.

Civil defense countermeasures, to be taken seriously by the population, require the publication of solid facts with the scientific evidence
to support those facts against political propaganda to the contrary. Secrecy over the effects of nuclear weapons tests does not hinder
plutonium and missile production by rogue states, but it does hinder civil defense countermeasures, by permitting lying political
propaganda to go unopposed (see linked post, here).

Terrorists successfully prey on the vulnerable. The political spreading of lies concerning threats and the alleged ‘impossibility’ of all
countermeasures, terrorizing the population in order to ‘justify’ supposedly pro-peace disarmament policies in the 1920s-1930s,
resulted in the secret rearmament of fascist states which were terrorizing the Jews and others, eventually leading to World War II.

Political exaggerations about nuclear weapons effects today:

(1) encourage terrorist states and other groups to secretly invest in such weapons to use either for political intimidation or for future
use against countries which have no countermeasures, and

(2) falsely dismiss, in the eyes of the media and the public, cheap relatively effective countermeasures like civil defense and ABM.

Therefore, doom-mongering media lies make us vulnerable to the proliferation threat today in two ways, just as they led to both

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

25/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

(1) Exaggerations of offensive technology and a down-playing of simple countermeasures such as trenches, encouraged belligerent
states to start World War I in the false belief that modern technology implied overwhelming firepower which would terminate the
war quickly on the basis of offensive preparedness: if the facts about simple trench countermeasures against shelling and machine
guns during the American Civil War had been properly understood, it would have been recognised by Germany that a long war
based on munitions production and logistics would be necessary, and war would have been seen to be likely to lead to German
defeat against countries with larger overseas allies and colonies that could supply munitions and the other resources required to win

(2) Exaggerations of aerial bombardment technology after World War I led to disarmament ‘supported by’ false claims that it was
impossible to have any defense against a perceived threat of instant annihilation from thousands of aircraft carrying gas and
incendiary bombs, encouraging fascists to secretly rearm in order to successfully take advantage of the fear and vulnerability
caused by this lying political disarmament propaganda.

Contrived dismissal of civil defense by Marxist “Cambridge Scientists Anti-War Group” bigots: (a) appeased war-mongering
enemies, and (b) maximised war mortality rates. Idealism kills. Super effective, fully proof-tested, cheap civil defense makes nuclear
deterrence credible to stop conventional war devastation by avoiding collateral damage, tit-for-tat retaliation and escalation.

Historically, it has been proved that having weapons is not enough to guarantee a reasonable measure of safety from terrorism and rogue
states; countermeasures are also needed, both to make any deterrent credible and to negate or at least mitigate the effects of a terrorist
attack. Some people who wear seatbelts die in car crashes; some people who are taken to hospital in ambulances, even in peace-time, die.
Sometimes, lifebelts and lifeboats cannot save lives at sea. This lack of a 100% success rate in saving lives doesn't disprove the value of
everyday precautions or of hospitals and medicine. Hospitals don't lull motorists into a false sense of security, causing them to drive faster
and cause more accidents. Like-minded ‘arguments’ against ABM and civil defense are similarly vacuous.

‘As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile system that is cost-effective and proven. If the Iranian threat is
eliminated, we will have a stronger basis for security, and the driving force for missile-defense construction in Europe will be removed.’

- President Obama, Prague Castle, Czech Republic, 4 April 2009.

Before 9/11, Caspar Weinberger was quizzed by skeptical critics on the BBC News program Talking Point, Friday, May 4, 2001:
Caspar Weinberger quizzed on new US Star Wars ABM plans:

‘The [ABM] treaty was in 1972 ... The theory ... supporting the ABM treaty [which prohibits ABM, thus making nations vulnerable to
terrorism] ... that it will prevent an arms race ... is perfect nonsense because we have had an arms race all the time we have had the ABM
treaty, and we have seen the greatest increase in proliferation of nuclear weapons that we have ever had. ... So the ABM treaty preventing an
arms race is total nonsense. ...

‘You have to understand that without any defences whatever you are very vulnerable. It is like saying we don't like chemical warfare - we
don't like gas attacks - so we are going to give up and promise not to have any defences ever against them and that of course would
mean then we are perfectly safe. ...

‘The Patriot was not a failure in the Gulf War - the Patriot was one of the things which defeated the Scud and in effect helped us win the
Gulf War. One or two of the shots went astray but that is true of every weapon system that has ever been invented. ...

‘The fact that a missile defence system wouldn't necessarily block a suitcase bomb is certainly not an argument for not proceeding
with a missile defence when a missile that hits can wipe out hundreds of thousands of lives in a second. ...

‘The curious thing about it is that missile defence is not an offensive weapon system - missile defence cannot kill anybody. Missile
defence can help preserve and protect your people and our allies, and the idea that you are somehow endangering people by having
a defence strikes me almost as absurd as saying you endanger people by having a gas mask in a gas attack. ...

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

26/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

‘President Bush said that we were going ahead with the defensive system but we would make sure that nobody felt we had offensive
mtentions because we would accompany it by a unilateral reduction of our nuclear arsenal. It seems to me to be a rather clear statement that
proceeding with the missile defence system would mean fewer arms of this kind.

‘You have had your arms race all the time that the ABM treaty was in effect and now you have an enormous accumulation and increase of
nuclear weapons and that was your arms race promoted by the ABM treaty. Now if you abolish the ABM treaty you are not going to get
another arms race - you have got the arms already there - and if you accompany the missile defence construction with the unilateral
reduction of our own nuclear arsenal then it seems to me you are finally getting some kind of inducement to reduce these weapons.’

Before the ABM system is in place, and afterwards if ABM fails to be 100% effective in an attack, or is bypassed by terrorists using a bomb
in a suitcase or in a ship, civil defense is required and can be effective at saving lives:

‘Paradoxically, the more damaging the effect, that is the farther out its lethality stretches, the more can be done about it, because in the last
fall of its power it covers vast areas, where small mitigations will save very large numbers of people.’

- Peter Laurie, Beneath the City Streets: A Private Inquiry into the Nuclear Preoccupations of Government, Penguin, 1974.

‘The purpose of a book is to save people [the] time and effort of digging things out for themselves. ... we have tried to leave the reader with
something tangible - what a certain number of calories, roentgens, etc., means in terms of an effect on the human being. ... we must think of
the people we are writing for.’

- Dr Samuel Glasstone, DSc, letter dated 1 February 1957 to Colonel Dent L. Lay, Chief, Weapons Effects Division, U.S. Armed
Forces Special Weapons Project, Washington, D.C., pages 2 and 4, concerning the preparation of The Effects of Nuclear Weapons.

Glasstone and Dolan stated in The Effects of Nuclear Weapons (1977), Table 12.17 on page 546, that the median distance in
Hiroshima for survival after 20 days was 0.12 miles for people in concrete buildings and 1.3 miles for people standing outdoors.
Therefore the median distances for survival in modern city buildings and in the open differed by a factor of 11 for Hiroshima; the
difference in areas was thus a factor of ll 2 or about 120. Hence, taking cover in modern city buildings reduces the casualty rates and
the risks of being killed by a factor of 120 for Hiroshima conditions, contrary to popular media presented political propaganda that civil
defence is hopeless. This would reduce 120,000 casualties to 1,000 casualties.

From Dr Glasstone's Effects of Nuclear Weapons (1962/64 ed., page 631): ‘At distances between 0.3 and 0.4 mile from ground zero in
Hiroshima the average survival rate, for at least 20 days after the nuclear explosion, was less than 20 percent. Yet in two reinforced
concrete office buildings, at these distances, almost 90 percent of the nearly 800 occupants survived more than 20 days, although
some died later of radiation injury. Furthermore, of approximately 3,000 school students who were in the open and unshielded
within a mile of ground zero at Hiroshima, about 90 percent were dead or missing after the explosion. But of nearly 5,000 students
in the same zone who were shielded in one way or another, only 26 percent were fatalities. ... survival in Hiroshima was possible in
buildings at such distances that the overpressure in the open was 15 to 20 pounds per square inch. ... it is evident ... that the area
over which protection could be effective in saving lives is roughly eight to ten times as great as that in which the chances of survival

Lord Mayhew, House of Lords debate on Civil Defence (General Local Authority Functions) Regulations, Hansard, vol. 444, cc.
523-49, 1 November 1983: ‘... if there had been effective civil defence at Hiroshima probably thousands of lives would have been
saved and much human suffering would have been avoided. There is no question about it. ...’

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

27/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

Since the 1977 update by Glasstone and Dolan, extensive new updates to EM-1 for a further revised edition of The Effects of Nuclear
Weapons have not actually been published with unlimited public distribution, due to President Carter’s 1979 executive order which
transferred responsibility for civil defense from the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Civil Preparedness Agency to
the new agency (which is not an Agency of the U.S. Department of Defense, and is not concerned with the analysis of nuclear weapons test
effects data), the Federal Emergency Management Agency. However, the February 1997 U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Special
Weapons Agency 0602715H RDT&E Budget Item Justification Sheet (R-2 Exhibit) states that a revision of Glasstone and Dolan’s
unclassified Effects of Nuclear Weapons was budgeted for 1997-9:

“FY 1997 Plans: ... Provide text to update Glasstone's book. The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, the standard reference for nuclear
weapons effects. ... Update the unclassified textbook entitled, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. ... Continue revision of Glasstone's
book, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, the standard reference for nuclear weapons effects. ... FY1999 Plans ... Disseminate updated
The Effects of Nuclear Weapons .”

The new publications are either classified or unclassified with limited distribution restrictions (e.g., Bridgman’s Introduction to the
Physics of Nuclear Weapons Effects, which includes several chapters on nuclear weapons design to enable initial radiation outputs to
be calculated precisely) which prevents up-to-date basic nuclear effects information to justify civil defense against the latest nuclear threats
from being widely disseminated; the books are printed for use only by government agencies. The problem with this approach is that
widespread public understanding of the best information for civil defense countermeasures is prevented.

‘The evidence from Hiroshima indicates that blast survivors, both injured and uninjured, in buildings later consumed by fire [caused by the
blast overturning charcoal braziers used for breakfast in inflammable wooden houses filled with easily ignitable bamboo furnishings and
paper screens] were generally able to move to safe areas following the explosion. Of 130 major buildings studied by the U.S. Strategic
Bombing Survey ... 107 were ultimately burned out ... Of those suffering fire, about 20 percent were burning after the first half hour. The
remainder were consumed by fire spread, some as late as 15 hours after the blast. This situation is not unlike the one our computer-based
fire spread model described for Detroit.’

- Defense Civil Preparedness Agency, U.S. Department of Defens e, DCPA Attack Environment Manual, Chapter 3: What the Planner Needs
to Know About Fire Ignition and Spread, report CPG 2-1A3, June 1973, Panel 27.

The Effects of the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, US Strategic Bombing Survey, Pacific Theatre, report 92, volume 2 (May
1947, secret):

Volume one, page 14:

“... the city lacked buildings with fire-protective features such as automatic fire doors and automatic sprinkler systems”, and pages
26-28 state the heat flash in Hiroshima was only:

“... capable of starting primary fires in exposed, easily combustible materials such as dark cloth, thin paper, or dry rotted wood
exposed to direct radiation at distances usually within 4,000 feet of the point of detonation (AZ).”

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

Volume two examines the firestorm and the ignition of clothing by the thermal radiation flash in Hiroshima:

Page 24:

“Scores of persons throughout all sections of the city were questioned concerning the ignition of clothing by the flash from the
bomb. ... Ten school boys were located during the study who had been in school yards about 6,200 feet east and 7,000 feet west,
respectively, from AZ [air zero]. These boys had flash burns on the portions of their faces which had been directly exposed to rays
of the bomb. The boys’ stories were consistent to the effect that their clothing, apparently of cotton materials, ‘smoked,’ but did not
burst into flame. ... a boy’s coat ... started to smoulder from heat rays at 3,800 feet from AZ.” [Contrast this to the obfuscation and
vagueness in Glasstone, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons'.]

Page 88:

“Ignition of the City. ... Only directly exposed surfaces were flash burned. Measured from GZ, flash burns on wood poles were
observed at 13,000 feet, granite was roughened or spalled by heat at 1,300 feet, and vitreous tiles on roofs were blistered at 4,000
feet. ... six persons who had been in reinforced-concrete buildings within 3,200 feet of air zero stated that black cotton blackout
curtains were ignited by radiant heat ... dark clothing was scorched and, in some cases, reported to have burst into flame from flash
heat [ although as the 1946 unclassified USSBS report admits, most immediately beat the flames out with their hands without sustaining
injury, because the clothing was not drenched in gasoline, unlike peacetime gasoline tanker road accident victims [

“... but a large proportion of over 1,000 persons questioned was in agreement that a great majority of the original fires was started
by debris falling on kitchen charcoal fires, by industrial process fires, or by electric short circuits. Hundreds of fires were reported
to have started in the centre of the city within 10 minutes after the explosion. Of the total number of buildings investigated [135
buildings are listed) 107 caught fire, and in 69 instances, the probable cause of initial ignition of the buildings or their contents was
as follows: (1) 8 by direct radiated heat from the bomb (primary fire), (2) 8 by secondary sources, and (3) 53 by fire spread from
exposed [wooden] buildings.”

‘It is true that the Soviets have tested nuclear weapons of a yield higher than that which we thought necessary, but the 100-megaton
bomb of which they spoke two years ago does not and will not change the balance of strategic power. The United States has chosen,
deliberately, to concentrate on more mobile and more efficient weapons, with lower but entirely sufficient yield ...’ - President John
F. Kennedy in his television broadcast to the American public, 26 July 1963.

‘During World War II many large cities in England, Germany, and Japan were subjected to terrific attacks by high-explosive and incendiary
bombs. Yet, when proper steps had been taken for the protection of the civilian population and for the restoration of services after the
bombing, there was little, if any, evidence of panic. It is the purpose of this book to state the facts concerning the atomic bomb, and to make
an objective, scientific analysis of these facts. It is hoped that as a result, although it may not be feasible completely to allay fear, it will at
least be possible to avoid panic.’

- Dr George Gamow (the big bang cosmologist). Dr Samuel Glasstone, DSc (Executive Editor of the book), and Professor Joseph O.
Hirschfelder, The Effects of Atomic Weapons, Chapter 1, p. 1, Paragraph 1.3, U.S. Department of Defense, September 1950.

‘The consequences of a multiweapon nuclear attack would certainly be grave ... Nevertheless, recovery should be possible if plans exist and
are carried out to restore social order and to mitigate the economic disruption. ’

- Philip J. Dolan, editor of Nuclear Weapons Employment FM 101-31 (1963), Capabilities of Nuclear Weapons DNA-EM-1 (1972), and
The Effects of Nuclear Weapons (1977), Stanford Research Institute, Appendix A of the U.S. National Council on Radiological protection
(NCRP) symposium The Control of Exposure to the Public of Ionising Radiation in the Event of Accident or Attack, 1981.

‘Suppose the bomb dropped on Hiroshima had been 1,000 times as powerful ... It could not have killed 1,000 times as many people, but at
most the entire population of Hiroshima ... [regarding the hype about various nuclear "overkill" exaggerations] there is enough water in the
oceans to drown everyone ten times.’

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

29/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

- Professor Brian Martin, PhD (physics), 'The global health effects of nuclear war', Current Affairs Bulletin, Vol. 59, No. 7,

December 1982, pp. 14-26.

In 1996, half a century after the nuclear detonations, data on cancers from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors was published by D. A.
Pierce et al. of the Radiation Effects Research Foundation, RERF ( Radiation Research vol. 146 pp. 1-27; Science vol. 272, pp. 632-3) for
86,572 survivors, of whom 60% had received bomb doses of over 5 mSv (or 500 millirem in old units) suffering 4,741 cancers of which
only 420 were due to radiation, consisting of 85 leukemias and 335 solid cancers.

‘Today we have a population of 2,383 [radium dial painter] cases for whom we have reliable body content measurements. . . . All 64 bone
sarcoma [cancer] cases occurred in the 264 cases with more than 10 Gy [1,000 rads], while no sarcomas appeared in the 2,1 19 radium cases
with less than 10 Gy.’

- Dr Robert Rowland, Director of the Center for Human Radiobiology, Bone Sarcoma in Humans Induced by Radium: A Threshold
Response?, Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting, European Society for Radiation Biology, Radioprotection colloquies, Vol. 32CI
(1997), pp. 331-8.

Zbigniew Jaworowski, ’Radiation Risk and Ethics: Health Hazards, Prevention Costs, and Radiophobia', Physics Today, April 2000,
pp. 89-90:

‘... it is important to note that, given the effects of a few seconds of irradiation at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, a threshold near 200
mSv may be expected for leukemia and some solid tumors. [Sources: UNSCEAR, Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation, New York,
1994; W. F. Heidenreich, et al., Radiat. Environ. Biophys., vol. 36 (1999), p. 205; and B. L. Cohen, Radiat. Res., vol. 149 (1998), p. 525.]
For a protracted lifetime natural exposure, a threshold may be set at a level of several thousand millisieverts for malignancies, of 10 grays
for radium-226 in bones, and probably about 1. 5-2.0 Gy for lung cancer after x-ray and gamma irradiation. [Sources: G. Jaikrishan, et al..
Radiation Research, vol. 152 (1999), p. S149 (for natural exposure); R. D. Evans, Health Physics, vol. 27 (1974), p. 497 (for radium-226);
H. H. Rossi and M. Zaider, Radiat. Environ. Biophys., vol. 36 (1997), p. 85 (for radiogenic lung cancer).] The hormetic effects, such as a
decreased cancer incidence at low doses and increased longevity, may be used as a guide for estimating practical thresholds and for setting
standards. ...

‘Though about a hundred of the million daily spontaneous DNA damages per cell remain unrepaired or misrepaired, apoptosis,
differentiation, necrosis, cell cycle regulation, intercellular interactions, and the immune system remove about 99% of the altered cells.
[Source: R. D. Stewart, Radiation Research, vol. 152 (1999), p. 101.] ...

‘[Due to the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986] as of 1998 (according to UNSCEAR), a total of 1,791 thyroid cancers in children had been
registered. About 93% of the youngsters have a prospect of full recovery. [Source: C. R. Moir and R. L. Telander, Seminars in Pediatric
Surgery, vol. 3 (1994), p. 182.] ... The highest average thyroid doses in children (177 mGy) were accumulated in the Gomel region of
Belarus. The highest incidence of thyroid cancer (17.9 cases per 100,000 children) occurred there in 1995, which means that the rate had
increased by a factor of about 25 since 1987.

‘This rate increase was probably a result of improved screening [not radiation!]. Even then, the incidence rate for occult thyroid cancers was
still a thousand times lower than it was for occult thyroid cancers in nonexposed populations (in the US, for example, the rate is 13,000 per
100,000 persons, and in Finland it is 35,600 per 100,000 persons). Thus, given the prospect of improved diagnostics, there is an enormous
potential for detecting yet more [fictitious] "excess" thyroid cancers. In a study in the US that was performed during the period of active
screening in 1974-79, it was determined that the incidence rate of malignant and other thyroid nodules was greater by 21 -fold than it had
been in the pre-1974 period. [Source: Z. Jaworowski, 21st Century Science and Technology, vol. 1 1 (1998), issue 1, p. 14.]’

‘Professor Edward Lewis used data from four independent populations exposed to radiation to demonstrate that the incidence of leukemia
was linearly related to the accumulated dose of radiation. ... Outspoken scientists, including Linus Pauling, used Lewis’s risk estimate to
inform the public about the danger of nuclear fallout by estimating the number of leukemia deaths that would be caused by the test
detonations. In May of 1957 Lewis’s analysis of the radiation-induced human leukemia data was published as a lead article in Science
magazine. In June he presented it before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy of the US Congress. ’ - Abstract of thesis by Jennifer

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

30/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

Caron, Edward Lewis and Radioactive Fallout: the Impact of Caltech Biologists Over Nuclear Weapons Testing in the 1950s and 60s,
Caltech, January 2003.

Dr John F. Loutit of the Medical Research Council, Harwell, England, in 1 962 wrote a book called Irradiation of Mice and Men (University
of Chicago Press, Chicago and London), discrediting the pseudo-science from geneticist Edward Lewis on pages 6 1 , and 78-79:

Mole [R. H. Mole, Brit. J. Radiol., v32, p497, 1959] gave different groups of mice an integrated total of 1,000 r of X-rays over a period
of 4 weeks. But the dose-rate - and therefore the radiation-free time between fractions - was varied from 8 1 r/hour intermittently to 1 .3
r/hour continuously. The incidence of leukemia varied from 40 per cent (within 1 5 months of the start of irradiation) in the first group to 5
per cent in the last compared with 2 per cent incidence in irradiated controls. . . .

‘What Lewis did, and which I have not copied, was to include in his table another group - spontaneous incidence of leukemia (Brooklyn,
N.Y.) - who are taken to have received only natural background radiation throughout life at the very low dose-rate of 0.1 -0.2 rad per year:
the best estimate is listed as 2 x 10" 6 like the others in the table. But the value of 2 x 10" 6 was not calculated from the data as for the other
groups; it was merely adopted. By its adoption and multiplication with the average age in years of Brooklyners - 33.7 years and radiation
dose per year of 0.1 -0.2 rad - a mortality rate of 7 to 13 cases per million per year due to background radiation was deduced, or some 10-20
per cent of the observed rate of 65 cases per million per year. ...

‘All these points are very much against the basic hypothesis of Lewis of a linear relation of dose to leukemic effect irrespective of time.
Unhappily it is not possible to claim for Lewis’s work as others have done, “It is now possible to calculate - within narrow limits - how
many deaths from leukemia will result in any population from an increase in fall-out or other source of radiation” [Leading article in
Science.v ol. 125, p. 963, 1957]. This is just wishful journalese.

‘The burning questions to me are not what are the numbers of leukemia to be expected from atom bombs or radiotherapy, but what is to be
expected from natural background .... Furthermore, to obtain estimates of these, I believe it is wrong to go to [1950s inaccurate, dose rate
effect ignoring, data from] atom bombs, where the radiations are qualitatively different [i.e., including effects from neutrons] and, more
important, the dose-rate outstandingly different.’

Samuel Glasstone and Philip J. Dolan, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, 3rd ed., 1977, pp. 611-3:

‘From the earlier studies of radiation-induced mutations, made with ffuitflies [by Nobel Laureate Hermann J. Muller and other geneticists
who worked on plants, who falsely hyped their insect and plant data as valid for mammals like humans during the June 1957 U.S.
Congressional Hearings on fallout effects], it appeared that the number (or frequency) of mutations in a given population ... is proportional
to the total dose ... More recent experiments with mice, however, have shown that these conclusions need to be revised, at least for
mammals. [ Mammals are biologically closer to humans, in respect to DNA rep a ha In short-lived insects whose life cycles

are too small to have forced the evolutionary development of advanced DNA repair mechanisms, unlike mammals that need to survive for
decades before reproducing .] When exposed to X-rays or gamma rays, the mutation frequency in these animals has been found to be
dependent on the exposure (or dose) rate ...

‘At an exposure rate of 0.009 roentgen per minute [0.54 R/hour], the total mutation frequency in female mice is indistinguishable
from the spontaneous frequency. [Emphasis added ] There thus seems to be an exposure-rate threshold below which radiation-
induced mutations are absent ... with adult female mice ... a delay of at least seven weeks between exposure to a substantial dose of
radiation, either neutrons or gamma rays, and conception causes the mutation frequency in the offspring to drop almost to zero. ... recovery
in the female members of the population would bring about a substantial reduction in the 'load' of mutations in subsequent generations.’

George Bernard Shaw cynically explains groupthink brainwashing bias:

‘We cannot help it because we are so constituted that we always believe finally what we wish to believe. The moment we want to believe
something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it and become blind to the arguments against it. The moment we want to disbelieve
anything we have previously believed, we suddenly discover not only that there is a mass of evidence against, but that this evidence was
staring us in the face all the time.’

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

31/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

From the essay titled ‘What is Science?’ by Professor Richard P. Feynman, presented at the fifteenth annual meeting of the National Science
Teachers Association, 1966 in New York City, and published in The Physics Teacher, vol. 7, issue 6, 1968, pp. 313-20:

great religions are dissipated by following form without remembering the direct content of the teaching of the great leaders. In the same
way, it is possible to follow form and call it science, but that is pseudo-science. In this way, we all suffer from the kind of tyranny we have
today in the many institutions that have come under the influence of pseudoscientific advisers.

‘We have many studies in teaching, for example, in which people make observations, make lists, do statistics, and so on, but these do not
thereby become established science, established knowledge. They are merely an imitative form of science analogous to the South Sea
Islanders’ airfields - radio towers, etc., made out of wood. The islanders expect a great airplane to arrive. They even build wooden airplanes
of the same shape as they see in the foreigners' airfields around them, but strangely enough, their wood planes do not fly. The result of this
pseudoscientific imitation is to produce experts, which many of you are. ... you teachers, who are really teaching children at the bottom of
the heap, can maybe doubt the experts. As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of

Richard P. Feynman, ‘This Unscientific Age’, in The Meaning of It All, Penguin Books, London, 1998, pages 106-9:

‘Now, I say if a man is absolutely honest and wants to protect the populace from the effects of radioactivity, which is what our scientific
friends often say they are trying to do, then he should work on the biggest number, not on the smallest number, and he should try to point
out that the [natural cosmic] radioactivity which is absorbed by living in the city of Denver is so much more serious [than the smaller doses
from nuclear explosions] ... that all the people of Denver ought to move to lower altitudes.'

Feynman is not making a point about low level radiation effects, but about the politics of ignoring the massive natural background radiation
dose, while provoking hysteria over much smaller measured fallout pollution radiation doses. Why is the anti-nuclear lobby so concerned
about banning nuclear energy - which is not possible even in principle since most of our nuclear radiation is from the sun and from
supernova debris contaminating the Earth from the explosion that created the solar system circa 4,540 million years ago - when they could
cause much bigger radiation dose reductions to the population by concentrating on the bigger radiation source, natural background
radiation. It is possible to shield natural background radiation by the air, e.g. by moving the population of high altitude cities to lower
altitudes where there is more air between the people and outer space, or banning the use of high-altitude jet aircraft. The anti-nuclear lobby,
as Feynman stated back in the 1960s, didn't crusade to reduce the bigger dose from background radiation. Instead they chose to argue
against the much smaller doses from fallout pollution. Feynman's argument is still today falsely interpreted as a political statement, when it
is actually exposing pseudo-science and countering political propaganda. It is still ignored by the media. It has been pointed out by Senator
Hickenlooper on page 1060 of the May- June 1957 U.S. Congressional Hearings before the Special Subcommittee on Radiation of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy, The Nature of Radioactive Fallout and Its Effects on Man:

‘I presume all of us would earnestly hope that we never had to test atomic weapons ... but by the same token I presume that we want to save
thousands of lives in this country every year and we could just abolish the manufacture of [road accident causing] automobiles ...’

Dihydrogen monoxide is a potentially very dangerous chemical containing hydrogen and oxygen which has caused numerous severe bums
by scalding and deaths by drowning, contributes to the greenhouse effect, accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals, and contributes
to the erosion of our natural landscape: 'Dihydrogen monoxide (DHMO) is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of
people every year. Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do not end
there. Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and
urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance. For those who have become dependent, DHMO
withdrawal means certain death.'

From the site for the petition against dihydrogen monoxide: ‘Please sign this petition and help stop This Invisible Killer. Get the
government to do something now. ... Contamination Is Reaching Epidemic Proportions! Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have
been found in almost every stream, lake, and reservoir in America today. But the pollution is global, and the contaminant has even
been found in Antarctic ice. DHMO has caused millions of dollars of property damage in the Midwest, and recently California.’

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

32/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

A recent example of the pseudoscientific radiation 'education' masquerading as science that Feynman (quoted above) objected to in
the 1960s was published in 2009 in an article called 'The proportion of childhood leukaemia incidence in Great Britain that may be
caused by natural background ionizing radiation' in Leukemia, vol. 23 (2009), pp. 770-776, which falsely asserts - in contradiction
to the evidence that the no-threshold model is contrary to Hiroshima and Nagasaki data: 'Risk models based primarily on studies of
the Japanese atomic bomb survivors imply that low-level exposure to ionizing radiation, including ubiquitous natural background
radiation, also raises the risk of childhood leukaemia. Using two sets of recently published leukaemia risk models and estimates of
natural background radiation red-bone-marrow doses received by children, about 20% of the cases of childhood leukaemia in
Great Britain are predicted to be attributable to this source.' The authors of this pseudoscience which is the opposite of the facts are
R. Wakeford (Dalton Nuclear Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK), G. M. Kendall (Childhood Cancer Research
Group, Oxford, UK), and M. P. Little (Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK). It is
disgusting and sinful that the facts about childhood leukemia are being lied on so blatantly for non-scientific purposes, and it is to
be hoped that these leukemia investigators will either correct their errors or alternatively be banned from using scientific literature
to promote false dogma for deception until they mend the error of their ways and repent their sins in this matter.

Protein P53, discovered only in 1979, is encoded by gene TP53, which occurs on human chromosome 17. P53 also occurs in other
mammals including mice, rats and dogs. P53 is one of the proteins which continually repairs breaks in DNA, which easily breaks at body
temperature: the DNA in each cell of the human body suffers at least two single strand breaks every second, and one double strand (i.e.
complete double helix) DNA break occurs at least once every 2 hours (5% of radiation-induced DNA breaks are double strand breaks, while

0. 007. of spontaneous DNA breaks at body temperature are double strand breaks)! Cancer occurs when several breaks in DNA happen to
occur by chance at nearly the same time, giving several loose strand ends at once, which repair proteins like P53 then repair incorrectly,
causing a mutation which can be proliferated somatically. This cannot occur when only one break occurs, because only two loose ends are
produced, and P53 will reattach them correctly. But if low-LET ionising radiation levels are increased to a certain extent, causing more
single strand breaks, P53 works faster and is able deal with faster breaks as they occur, so that multiple broken strand ends do not arise. This
prevents DNA strands being repaired incorrectly, and prevents cancer - a result of mutation caused by faults in DNA - from arising. Too
much radiation of course overloads the P53 repair mechanism, and then it cannot repair breaks as they occur, so multiple breaks begin to
appear and loose ends of DNA are wrongly connected by P53, causing an increased cancer risk.

1 . DNA-damaging free radicals are equivalent to a source of sparks which is always present naturally.

2. Cancer is equivalent the fire you get if the sparks are allowed to ignite the gasoline, i.e. if the free radicals are allowed to damage DNA
without the damage being repaired.

3. Protein P53 is equivalent to a fire suppression system which is constantly damping out the sparks, or repairing the damaged DNA so that
cancer doesn’t occur.

In this way of thinking, the ‘cause’ of cancer will be down to a failure of a DNA repairing enzyme like protein P53 to repair the damage.

Dr Jane Orient, 'Homeland Security for Physicians', Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, vol. 11, number 3, Fall 2006, pp.
75-9:

'In the 1960s, a group of activist physicians called Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) undertook to "educate the medical profession
and the world about the dangers of nuclear weapons," beginning with a series of articles in the New England Journal of Medicine. [Note
that journal was publishing information for anti-civil defense propaganda back in 1949, e.g. the article in volume 241, pp. 647-53 of
New England Journal of Medicine which falsely suggests that civil defense in nuclear war would be hopeless because a single
burned patient in 1947 with 40% body area burns required 42 oxygen tanks, 36 pints of plasma, 40 pints of whole blood, 104 pints
of fluids, 4,300 m of gauze, 3 nurses and 2 doctors. First, only unclothed persons in direct line of sight without shadowing can get
40% body area burns from thermal radiation, second, duck and cover offers protection in a nuclear attack warning, and G. V.
LeRoy had already published, two years earlier, in J.A.M.A., volume 134, 1947, pp. 1143-8, that less than 5% of burns in Hiroshima
and Nagasaki were caused by building and debris fires. In medicine it is always possible to expend vast resources on patients who
are fatally injured. In a mass casualty situation, doctors should not give up just because they don't have unlimited resources; as at

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

33/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they would need to do their best with what they have.) On its website, www.psr.org, the group boasts that it
"led the campaign to end atmospheric nuclear testing." With this campaign, the linear no-threshold (LNT) theory of radiation carcinogenesis
became entrenched. It enabled activists to calculate enormous numbers of potential casualties by taking a tiny risk and multiplying it by the
population of the earth. As an enduring consequence, the perceived risks of radiation are far out of proportion to actual risks, causing
tremendous damage to the American nuclear industry. ... Efforts to save lives were not only futile, but unethical: Any suggestion that
nuclear war could be survivable increased its likelihood and was thus tantamount to warmongering, PSR spokesmen warned. ...

'For the mindset that engendered and enables this situation, which jeopardizes the existence of the United States as a nation as well as the
lives of millions of its citizens, some American physicians and certain prestigious medical organizations bear a heavy responsibility.

'Ethical physicians should stand ready to help patients to the best of their ability, and not advocate sacrificing them in the name of a political
agenda. Even very basic knowledge, especially combined with simple, inexpensive advance preparations, could save countless lives.'

Dr Theodore B. Taylor, Proceedings of the Second Interdisciplinary Conference on Selected Effects of a General War, DASIAC Special
Report 95, July 1969, vol. 2, DASA-2019-2, AD0696959, page 298 (also linked here):

'I must just say that as far as I'm concerned I have had some doubts about whether we should have had a civil defense program in the past. I
have no doubt whatsoever now, for this reason, that I've seen ways in which the deterrent forces can fail to hold things off, so that no
matter what our national leaders do, criminal organizations, what have you, groups of people over which we have no control
whatsoever, can threaten other groups of people.’

This point of Taylor is the key fact on the morality. Suppose we disarm and abandon nuclear power. That won't stop fallout from a
war, terrorists, or a foreign reactor blast from coming. Civil defence knowledge is needed. Even when America has ABM, it will be
vulnerable to wind carried fallout. No quantity of pacifist hot air will protect people against radiation.

Charles J. Hitch and Roland B. McKean of the RAND Corporation in their 1960 book The Economics of Defense in the Nuclear Age,
Harvard University Press, Massachusetts, pp. 310-57:

‘With each side possessing only a small striking force, a small amount of cheating would give one side dominance over the other, and the
incentive to cheat and prepare a preventative attack would be strong ... With each side possessing, say, several thousand missiles, a vast
amount of cheating would be necessary to give one side the ability to wipe out the other’s striking capability. ... the more extensive a
disarmament agreement is, the smaller the force that a violator would have to hide in order to achieve complete domination. Most
obviously, “the abolition of the weapons necessary in a general or ‘unlimited’ war” would offer the most insuperable obstacles to an
inspection plan, since the violator could gain an overwhelming advantage from the concealment of even a few weapons.’

Disarmament after World War I caused the following problem which led to World War II (reported by Winston S. Churchill in the London
Daily Express newspaper of November 1, 1934):

‘Germany is arming secretly, illegally and rapidly. A reign of terror exists in Germany to keep secret the feverish and terrible preparations
they are making.’

British Prime Minister Thatcher's address to the United Nations General Assembly on disarmament on 23 June 1982, where she pointed out
that in the years since the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 10 million people had been killed by 140 non-nuclear conflicts:

‘The fundamental risk to peace is not the existence of weapons of particular types. It is the disposition on the part of some states to impose
change on others by resorting to force against other nations ... Aggressors do not start wars because an adversary has built up his own
strength. They start wars because they believe they can gain more by going to war than by remaining at peace.’

J. D. Culshaw, the then Director of the U.K. Home Office Scientific Advisory Branch, stated in his article in the Scientific Advisory Branch
journal Fission Fragments, September 1972 (issue No. 19), classified 'Restricted':

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

34/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

'Apart from those who don't want to know or can't be bothered, there seem to be three major schools of thought about the nature of a
possible Third World War ...

* 'The first group think of something like World War II but a little worse ...

* the second of World War II but very much worse ...

* 'and the third group think in terms of a catastrophe ...

'When the Armageddon concept is in favour, the suggestion that such problems exist leads to "way out" research on these phenomena, and it
is sufficient to mention a new catastrophic threat [e.g., 10 years later this was done by Sagan with "nuclear winter" hype, which turned out
to be fake because modem concrete cities can't produce firestorms like 1940s wooden-built areas of Hamburg, Dresden and Hiroshima] to
stimulate research into the possibilities of it arising. The underlying appeal of this concept is that if one could show that the execution of all
out nuclear, biological or chemical warfare would precipitate the end of the world, no one but a mad man would be prepared to initiate such
a war. [However, as history proves, plenty of mad men end up gaining power and leading countries into wars.]'

J. K. S. Clayton, then Director of the U.K. Home Office Scientific Advisory Branch, stated in his introduction, entitled The Challenge - Why
Home Defence?, to the 1977 Home Office Scientific Advisory Branch Training Manual for Scientific Advisers:

'Since 1945 we have had nine wars - in Korea, Malaysia and Vietnam, between China and India, China and Russia, India and Pakistan and
between the Arabs and Israelis on three occasions. We have had confrontations between East and West over Berlin, Formosa and Cuba.
There have been civil wars or rebellions in no less than eleven countries and invasions or threatened invasions of another five. Whilst it is
not suggested that all these incidents could have resulted in major wars, they do indicate the aptitude of mankind to resort to a forceful
solution of its problems, sometimes with success. ...'

It is estimated that Mongol invaders exterminated 3 5 million Chinese between 1311-40, without modem weapons . Communist Chinese
killed 26.3 million dissenters between 1949 and May 1965, according to detailed data compiled by the Russians on 7 April 1969. The Soviet
communist dictatorship killed 40 million dissenters, mainly owners of small farms, between 1917-59. Conventional (non-nuclear) air raids
on Japan killed 600,000 during World War II. The single incendiary air raid on Tokyo on 10 March 1945 killed 140,000 people (more than
the total for nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined) at much less than the $2 billion expense of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki
nuclear bombs! Non-nuclear air raids on Germany during World War II killed 593,000 civilians. The argument that the enemy will continue
stocking megaton fallout weapons if we go to cleaner weapons is irrelevant for deterrence, since we're not planning to start war, just to
credibly deter invasions. You should not try to lower your standards of warfare to those of your enemy to appease groupthink taboos, or you
will end up like Britain's leaders in the 1930s, trying to collaborate with fascists for popular applause.

House of Lords debate Nuclear Weapons: Destructive Power, published in Hansard, 14 June 1988:

Lord Haiisham of Saint Marylebone: ‘My Lords, if we are going into the question of lethality of weapons and seek thereby to isolate
the nuclear as distinct from the so-called conventional range, is there not a danger that the public may think that Vimy,
Passchendaele and Dresden were all right — sort of tea parties — and that nuclear war is something which in itself is unacceptable?’

Lord Trefgarne: ‘My Lords, the policy of making Europe, or the rest of the world, safe for conventional war is not one that I
support.’

House of Commons debate Civil Defence published in Hansard, 26 October 1983:

Mr. Bill Walker (Tayside, North): ‘I remind the House that more people died at Stalingrad than at Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Yet
people talk about fighting a conventional war in Europe as if it were acceptable. One rarely sees demonstrations by the so-called
peace movement against a conventional war in Europe, but it could be nothing but ghastly and horrendous. The casualties would
certainly exceed those at Stalingrad, and that cannot be acceptable to anyone who wants peace’

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

35/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

On 29 October 1982, Thatcher stated of the Berlin Wall: ‘In every decade since the war the Soviet leaders have been reminded that their
pitiless ideology only survives because it is maintained by force. But the day comes when the anger and frustration of the people is so great
that force cannot contain it. Then the edifice cracks : the mortar crumbles . . . one day, liberty will dawn on the other side of the wall. ’

On 22 November 1990, she said: ‘Today, we have a Europe ... where the threat to our security from the overwhelming conventional forces
of the Warsaw Pact has been removed; where the Berlin Wall has been tom down and the Cold War is at an end. These immense changes
did not come about by chance. They have been achieved by strength and resolution in defence, and by a refusal ever to be intimidated.’

'The case for civil defence stands regardless of whether a nuclear deterrent is necessary or not. ... Even if the U.K. were not itself at
war, we would be as powerless to prevent fallout from a nuclear explosion crossing the sea as was King Canute to stop the tide.' -
U.K. Home Office leaflet, Civil Defence, 1982.

‘... peace cannot be guaranteed absolutely. Nobody can be certain, no matter what policies this or any other Government were to adopt, that
the United Kingdom would never again be attacked. Also we cannot tell what form such an attack might take. Current strategic thinking
suggests that if war were to break out it would start with a period of conventional hostilities of uncertain duration which might or might not
escalate to nuclear conflict. ... while nuclear weapons exist there must always be a chance, however small, that they will be used against us
[like gas bombs in World War II], ... as a consequence of war between other nations in which we were not involved fall out from nuclear
explosions could fall on a neutral Britain. ... conventional war is not the soft option that is sometimes suggested. It is also too easily
forgotten that in World War II some 50 million people died and that conventional weapons have gone on killing people ever since 1945
without respite.’ - - The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Gray of Contin), House of Lords debate on Civil Defence (General
Local Authority Functions) Regulations, Hansard, vol. 444, cc. 523-49, 1 November 1983.

‘All of us are living in the light and warmth of a huge hydrogen bomb, 860,000 miles across and 93 million miles away, which is in a state
of continuous explosion.’ - Dr Isaac Asimov.

‘Dr Edward Teller remarked recently that the origin of the earth was somewhat like the explosion of the atomic bomb...’ - Dr Harold C.
Urey, The Planets: Their Origin and Development, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1952, p. ix.

‘But compared with a supernova a hydrogen bomb is the merest trifle. For a supernova is equal in violence to about a million million
million million hydrogen bombs all going off at the same time.’ - Sir Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), The Nature of the Universe, Pelican Books,
London, 1963, p. 75.

‘In fact, physicists find plenty of interesting and novel physics in the environment of a nuclear explosion. Some of the physical phenomena
are valuable objects of research, and promise to provide further understanding of nature. ’ - Dr Harold L. Brode, The RAND Corporation,
‘Review of Nuclear Weapons Effects,’ AnnualReview ofNuclear Science, Volume 18, 1968, pp. 153-202.

‘It seems that similarities do exist between the processes of formation of single particles from nuclear explosions and formation of the solar
system from the debris of a [4 x 10 28 megatons of TNT equivalent, type la] supernova explosion. We may be able to leam much more about
the origin of the earth, by further investigating the process of radioactive fallout from the nuclear weapons tests.’ - Dr Paul K. Kuroda
(1917-2001), University of Arkansas, ‘Radioactive Fallout in Astronomical Settings: Plutonium-244 in the Early Environment of the Solar
System,’ pages 83-96 of Radionuclides in the Environment: A Symposium Sponsored By the Division ofNuclear Chemistry and
Technology At the 1 55th Meeting of the American Chemical Society, San Francisco, California, April 1-3, 1 968, edited by Symposium
Chairman Dr Edward C. Freiling (1922-2000) of the U.S. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, Advances in Chemistry Series No. 93,
American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 1970.

Dr Paul K. Kuroda (1917-2001) in 1956 correctly predicted the existence of water-moderated natural nuclear reactors in flooded uranium
ore seams, which were discovered in 1972 by French physicist Francis Perrin in three ore deposits at Oklo in Gabon, where sixteen sites
operated as natural nuclear reactors with self-sustaining nuclear fission 2,000 million years ago, each lasting several hundred thousand
years, averaging 100 kW. The radioactive waste they generated remained in situ for a period of 2,000,000,000 years without escaping. They
were discovered during investigations into why the U-235 content of the uranium in the ore was only 0.7171% instead of the normal
0.7202%. Some of the ore, in the middle of the natural reactors, had a U-235 isotopic abundance of just 0.440%. Kuroda's brilliant paper is

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

36/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

entitled, 'On the Nuclear Physical Stability of the Uranium Minerals', published in the Journal of Chemical Physics, vol. 25 (1956), pp.
781-782 and 1295-1296.

A type la supernova explosion, always yielding 4 x 10 28 megatons of TNT equivalent, results from the critical mass effect of the collapse of
a white dwarf as soon as its mass exceeds 1 .4 solar masses due to matter falling in from a companion star. The degenerate electron gas in
the white dwarf is then no longer able to support the pressure from the weight of gas, which collapses, thereby releasing enough
gravitational potential energy as heat and pressure to cause the fusion of carbon and oxygen into heavy elements, creating massive amounts
of radioactive nuclides, particularly intensely radioactive nickel-56, but half of all other nuclides (including uranium and heavier) are also
produced by the 'R' (rapid) process of successive neutron captures by fusion products in supernovae explosions. Type la supemovae
occur typically every 400 years in the Milky Way galaxy. On 4 July 1054, Chinese astronomers observed in the sky (without optical
instruments) the bright supernova in the constellation Taurus which today is still visible as the Crab Nebula through telescopes. The Crab
Nebula debris has a diameter now of 7 light years and is still expanding at 800 miles/second. The supernova debris shock wave triggers star
formation when it encounters hydrogen gas in space by compressing it and seeding it with debris; bright stars are observed in the Orion
Halo, the 300 light year diameter remains of a supernova. It is estimated that when the solar system was forming 4,540 million years ago, a
supernova occurred around 100 light years away, and the heavy radioactive debris shock wave expanded at 1,000 miles/second. Most of the
heavy elements including iron, silicon and calcium in the Earth and people are the stable end products of originally radioactive decay chains
from the space burst fallout of a 7 x 10 26 megatons thermonuclear explosion, created by fusion and successive neutron captures after the
implosion of a white dwarf; a supernova explosion.

How would a 10 55 megaton hydrogen bomb explosion differ from the big bang? Ignorant answers biased in favour of curved spacetime
(ignoring quantum gravity!) abound, such as claims that explosions can’t take place in ‘outer space’ (disagreeing with the facts from nuclear
space bursts by Russia and America in 1962, not to mention natural supernova explosions in space!) and that explosions produce sound
waves in air by definition! There are indeed major differences in the nuclear reactions between the big bang and a nuclear bomb. But it is
helpful to notice the solid physical fact that implosion systems suggest the mechanism of gravitation: in implosion, TNT is well-known to
produce an inward force on a bomb core, but Newton's 3rd law says there is an equal and opposite reaction force outward. In fact, you can’t
have a radially outward force without an inward reaction force! It’s the rocket principle. The rocket accelerates (with force F = ma) forward
by virtue of the recoil from accelerating the exhaust gas (with force F = -ma) in the opposite direction! Nothing massive accelerates without
an equal and opposite reaction force. Applying this fact to the measured 6 x 10' 10 ms' 2 ~ He cosmological acceleration of matter
radially outward from observers in the universe which was predicted accurately in 1996 and later observationally discovered in 1999 (by
Perlmutter, et al.), we find an outward force F = ma and inward reaction force by the 3rd law. The inward force allows quantitative
predictions, and is mediated by gravitons, predicting gravitation in a checkable way (unlike string theory, which is just a landscape
of lO 500 different perturbative theories and so can’t make any falsifiable predictions about gravity). So it seems as if nuclear
explosions do indeed provide helpful analogies to natural features of the world, and the mainstream lambda-CDM model of cosmology -
with its force-fitted unobserved ad hoc speculative ‘dark energy’ - ignores and sweeps under the rug major quantum gravity effects which
increase the physical understanding of particle physics, particularly force unification and the relation of gravitation to the existing
electroweak SU(2) x U(l) section of the Standard Model of fundamental forces.

Richard Lieu, Physics Department, University of Alabama, ‘Lambda-CDM cosmology: how much suppression of credible evidence,
and does the model really lead its competitors, using all evidence?’, http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.2462.

Even Einstein grasped the possibility that general relativity's lambda-CDM model is at best just a classical approximation to quantum field
theory, at the end of his life when he wrote to Besso in 1954:

‘I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the [classical differential equation] field principle, i.e., on continuous structures.
In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, [non-quantum] gravitation theory included ...’

‘Science is the organized skepticism in the reliability of expert opinion.’ - Professor Richard P. Feynman (quoted by Professor Lee Smolin,
The Trouble with Physics, Houghton-Mifflin, New York, 2006, p. 307).

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

37/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

‘The expression of dissenting views may not seem like much of a threat to a powerful organization, yet sometimes it triggers an amazingly
hostile response. The reason is that a single dissenter can puncture an illusion of unanimity. ... Among those suppressed have been the
engineers who tried to point out problems with the Challenger space shuttle that caused it to blow up. More fundamentally, suppression is a
denial of the open dialogue and debate that are the foundation of a free society. Even worse than the silencing of dissidents is the chilling
effect such practices have on others. For every individual who speaks out, numerous others decide to play it safe and keep quiet. More
serious than external censorship is the problem of self-censorship.’

— Professor Brian Martin, University of Wollongong, 'Stamping Out Dissent', Newsweek, 26 April 1993, pp. 49-50

In 1896, Sir James Mackenzie-Davidson asked Wilhelm Rontgen, who discovered X-rays in 1895: ‘What did you think?’ Rontgen replied:

‘I did not think, I investigated.’ The reason? Cathode ray expert J. J. Thomson in 1894 saw glass fluorescence far from a tube, but due to
prejudice (expert opinion) he avoided investigating that X-ray evidence! ‘Science is the organized skepticism in the reliability of expert
opinion.’ - Richard Feynman, in Lee Smolin, The Trouble with Physics, Houghton-Mifflin, 2006, p. 307.

Mathematical symbols in this blog: your computer’s browser needs access to standard character symbol sets to display Greek symbols for
mathematical physics. If you don’t have the symbol character sets installed, the density symbol 'p' ( Rho ) will appear as ¥ and the V (Pi)
symbol will as 'p', causing confusion with the use of ¥ for radius and 'p' for momentum in formulae. This problem exists with Mozilla
Firefox 3, but not with Microsoft Explorer which displays Greek symbols.

About Me

B Name: nige

Currently designing secure active server page (ASP) front ends for client SQL databases. In 1982 I began programming in
basic, and at college learned Fortran while a physics undergraduate a decade later. Afterwards, I switched from mainstream
physics and mathematical education to part-time programming student, while working in a series of jobs including four years in
credit control, www.quantumfieldtheory.org http://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/capabilities-of-nuclear-weapons.html/
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=273#comment-5322. http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?
p=353&cpage=T#comment-8728. http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=215#comment-4082.

View my complete profile

From 1945-62, America tested 216 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, totalling 154 megatons, with a mean yield of 713 kilotons
From 1949-62, Russia tested 214 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, totalling 281 megatons, with a mean yield of 1.31 megatons
From 1952-8, Britain tested 21 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, totalling 10.8 megatons, with a mean yield of 514 kilotons
From 1960-74, France tested 46 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, totalling 11.4 megatons, with a mean yield of 248 kilotons
From 1964-80, China tested 23 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, totalling 21.5 megatons, with a mean yield of 935 kilotons

In summary, from 1945-80, America, Russia, Britain, France and China tested 520 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, totalling
478.7 megatons, with a mean yield of 921 kilotons

Mean yield of the 5,192 nuclear warheads and bombs in the deployed Russian nuclear stockpile as of January 2009: 0.317 Mt. Total yield:
1,646 Mt.

Mean yield of the 4,552 nuclear warheads and bombs in the deployed U.S. nuclear stockpile as of January 2007: 0.257 Mt. Total yield:

1,172 Mt.

For diffraction damage where damage areas scale as the two-thirds power of explosive yield, this stockpile's area damage potential can be
compared to the 20,000,000 conventional bombs of 100 kg size (2 megatons of TNT equivalent total energy) dropped on Germany during

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

38/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

World War II: (Total nuclear bomb blast diffraction damaged ground area)/) Total conventional blast diffraction damaged ground area to
Germany during World War II) = [4,552*(0.257 Mt) 2/3 ]/[20,000,000*(0.0000001 Mt) 2/3 ] = 1,840/431 = 4.3. Thus, although the entire U.S.
stockpile has a TNT energy equivalent to 586 times that of the 2 megatons of conventional bombs dropped on Germany in World War II, it
is only capable of causing 4.3 times as much diffraction type damage area, because any given amount of explosive energy is far more
efficient when distributed over many small explosions than in a single large explosion! Large explosions are inefficient because they cause
unintended collateral damage, wasting energy off the target area and injuring or damaging unintended targets!

In a controlled sample of 36,500 survivors, 89 people got leukemia over a 40 year period, above the number in the unexposed control group.
(Data: Radiation Research, volume 146, 1996, pages 1-27.) Over 40 years, in 36,500 survivors monitored, there were 176 leukemia deaths
which is 89 more than the control (unexposed) group got naturally. There were 4,687 other cancer deaths, but that was merely 339 above the
number in the control (unexposed) group, so this is statistically a much smaller rise than the leukemia result. Natural leukemia rates, which
are very low in any case, were increased by 51% in the irradiated survivors, but other cancers were merely increased by just 7%. Adding all
the cancers together, the total was 4,863 cancers (virtually all natural cancer, nothing whatsoever to do with radiation), which is just 428
more than the unexposed control group. Hence, the total increase over the natural cancer rate due to bomb exposure was only 9%, spread
over a period of 40 years. There was no increase whatsoever in genetic malformations.

There should be a note here about how unnatural radioactive pollution is (not) in space: the earth's atmosphere is a radiation shield
equivalent to being protected behind a layer of water 10 metres thick. This reduces the cosmic background radiation by a factor of
100 of what it would be without the earth's atmosphere. Away from the largely uninhabited poles, the Earth's magnetic field also
protects us against charged cosmic radiations, which are deflected and end up spiralling around the magnetic field at high altitude,
in the Van Allen trapped radiation belts. On the Moon, for example, there is no atmosphere or significant magnetic field so the natural
background radiation exposure rate at solar minimum is 1 milliRoentgen per hour (about 10 microSieverts/hour) some 100 times that
on the Earth (0.010 milliRoentgen per hour or about 0.10 microSieverts/hour). The Apollo astronauts visiting the Moon wore dosimeters
and they received an average of 2 75 milliRoentgens (about 2. 75 milliSieverts) of radiation (well over a year 's exposure to natural
background at sea level) in over just 19.5 days. It is a lot more than that during a solar flare, which is one of the concerns for
astronauts to avoid (micrometeorites are another concern in a soft spacesuit).

The higher up you are above sea level, the less of the atmosphere there is between you and space, so the less shielding you have to
protect you from the intense cosmic space radiations (emitted by thermonuclear reactors we call 'stars', as well as distant
supernovae explosions). At sea level, the air above you constitutes a radiation shield of 10 tons per square metre or the equivalent of
having a 10 metres thick water shield between you and outer space. As you go up a mountain or up in an aircraft, the amount of
atmosphere between you and space decreases, thus radiation levels increase with altitude because there is less shielding. The normal
background radiation exposure rate shoots up by a factor of 20, from 0.010 to 0.20 milliRoentgens per hour, when any airplane ascends
from sea level to 36,000 feet cruising altitude. (The now obsolete British Concorde supersonic transport used to maintain radiation-
monitoring equipment so that it could drop to lower-altitude flight routes if excessive cosmic radiation due to solar storms were
detected.) Flight aircrew get more radiation exposure than many nuclear industry workers at nuclear power plants. Residents of the
high altitude city of Denver get 100 milliRoentgens (about 1 milliSievert) more annual exposure than a resident of Washington,

D.C., but the mainstream anti-radiation cranks don't campaign for the city to be shut to save kids radiation exposure, for mountain
climbing to be banned, etc.!

1994 revised Introduction to Kearny’s Nuclear War Survival Skills, by Dr Edward Teller, January 14, 1994:

‘If defense is neglected these weapons of attack become effective. They become available and desirable in the eyes of an imperialist
dictator, even if his means are limited. Weapons of mass destruction could become equalizers between nations big and small, highly
developed and primitive, if defense is neglected. If defense is developed and if it is made available for general prevention of war, weapons
of aggression will become less desirable. Thus defense makes war itself less probable. ... One psychological defense mechanism against
danger is to forget about it. This attitude is as common as it is disastrous. It may turn a limited danger into a fatal difficulty.’

Advice of Robert Watson- Watt (Chief Scientist on the World War II British Radar Project, defending Britain against enemy attacks): ‘Give
them the third best to go on with, the second best comes too late, the best never comes.’

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

From Wikipedia (a source of groupthink): ‘Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize
conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. Individual creativity, uniqueness, and
independent thinking are lost in the pursuit of group cohesiveness, as are the advantages of reasonable balance in choice and
thought that might normally be obtained by making decisions as a group. During groupthink, members of the group avoid
promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking. A variety of motives for this may exist such as a desire to
avoid being seen as foolish, or a desire to avoid embarrassing or angering other members of the group. Groupthink may cause
groups to make hasty, irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the group’s balance.’

Links

r Google News

Dr Carl E. Baum's EMP theory and interaction notes
The Atomic Heritage Foundation

Radiation Effects Research Foundation lumps data together to cover up benefits of low dose radiation in Hiroshima and
Nagasaki Life Span Study!

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency) Nuclear testing histories (PDF files)

Samuel Giasstone and Philip J. Dolan

Carl F. Miller's fallout research at nuclear tests

British Home Office Scientific Advisory Branch

Samuel Cohen's book about the collateral damage averting, invasion-deterring neutron bomb he invented, and the lying
political attacks he endured as a result

Jerry Emanuelson's review of EMP facts, including the direct dependence of the EMP on the Earth's natural magnetic field
strength at the burst location

Essays by 1950s American nuclear weapon effects test (and neutron bomb design) experts, discrediting anti-civil defence
propaganda

Neutron bomb inventor Samuel Cohen's 2006 book on the history of the neutron bomb, the most moral weapon ever invented
due to its purely military deterrent capabilities, and the pesudo-scientific propaganda war he has had to endure from the enemies
of deterrence

Karl-Ludvig Gronhaug's EMP reports page with useful PDF downloads on prompt EMP and MHD-EMP measurements from
nuclear tests (Norwegian language)

Colonel Derek L. Duke's factual book on nuclear weapons accidents, Chasing Loose Nukes, as told to Fred Dungan
The H-Bomb and the birth of the Universe: 'For 100 Million years after time began, the universe was dark as pitch. The clouds
of hydrogen condensed into huge nuclear fireballs. That moment-when the universe first lit up-was the moment of creation that
matters...'

American EMP Interaction manual: comprehensive theory of both the EMP source mechanism and the EMP pick-up in cables
and antenna by electromagnetic inductance (30 MB PDF file)

British Mission to Japan, The Effects of the Atomic Bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, H. M. Stationery Office, London, 1946
(high quality 42.5 MB pdf file).

1950 edition (high quality 82.7 MB PDF file) of U.S. Department of Defense book The Effects of Atomic Weapons
1957 edition (high quality 90.8 MB PDF file) of subsequently deleted sections on nuclear tests of civil defense countermeasures
from U.S. Department of Defense book The Effects of Nuclear Weapons

1957 edition (low quality 30.6 MB PDF file) of entire U.S. Department of Defense book The Effects of Nuclear Weapons
1962/64 edition (high quality 188 MB PDF file) of major revised sections in the U.S. Department of Defense book The Effects of
Nuclear Weapons

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

40/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

1962/64 edition (high quality 43.8 MB PDF file) of 74 pages of subsequently deleted material dealing with thermal ignition of
houses at nuclear tests and civil defense countermeasures chapter, from the U.S. Department of Defense book The Effects of
Nuclear Weapons

1977 edition (single 36.8 MB PDF file) of U.S. Department of Defense book The Effects of Nuclear Weapons
Bill Forstchen, "One Second After" book about EMP attack risk and its effects on USA.

2 U.S. Department of Energy Opennet Documents Online (includes many Nevada and Pacific nuclear test reports as PDF files)
Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC)'s Scientific and Technical Information Network (STINET) Service (other
declassified Nevada and Pacific test reports)

Highlights from ABM testing history
THAAD Goes Another ABM Test

Alex Wellerstein's Restricted Data blog contains some interesting news (but beware of his uncritical use of unobstructed dry
desert and nude skin thermal radiation and other effects predictions from the 1977 edition of Glasstone and Dolan; he deletes
critically objective comments and pretends that honest criticisms of propaganda as being ignorant deception are rude as an excuse
for ignoring the facts and refusing to engage in objective discussion of controversial aspects of this topic; basically if you pay
homage and engage in groupthink bias you may be tolerated).

Carey Sublette's Nuclear Weapon Archive (it contains errors from Chuck Hansen's compilation, and it is concentrated on
bomb building, not on civil defence countermeasure evaluations done at nuclear tests; note that Chuck Hansen's books and CDs
give a false quotation from Neil O' Hines's book Proving Groundson the effects of the 1952 Mike explosion on nearby Engebi
Island, where Hines later in the book states that the native rats in fact survived the intense close-in blast, heat and fallout under a
few unches of soil, despite the initial ignorant belief that they could not have survived! ! !)

• Quantum Field Theory

• Los Alamos Science journal

• Excellent particle physics gauge theory (fundamental force interaction) issue of Los Alamos Science journal

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

41/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

42/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

15 MT BRAVO, 3.5 SECONDS. PHOTOGRAPHED FROM 12,501

Chemical and Biological Warfare Protective Measures

oml

Investigation of the Gamma Radiation Hazards Incid...
Multiculturalism based civil wars, multiculturahs...

The infamy of Jeremy Corbyn's CND pseudoscientific...
Politically biased science: Nature peer-reviewed a...
Review of Kenneth Ford's book Building the H Bomb,...
7 kiloton North Korean miniature hydrogen bomb or ...
Herman Kahn's On Thermonuclear War: why nuclear w

ORNL/TM- 10423

Technical Options for
Protecting Civilians from
Toxic Vapors and Gases

C. V. Chester

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

43/44

31/10/2016

Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

Thermal radiation shielding by crater ejecta in th...
Hiroshima's air raid shelters were unoccupied beca...

UK Home Office Scientific Advisory Branch debunked...

The Bank of Japan, Hiroshima, survived 380 m from Ground Zero, within the firestorm area, when fires were extinguished by
water buckets by its survivors, the majority of people in the building having survived. Secret US Strategic Bombing Survey report
proves civil defense for modern concrete buildings is effective. The building was reopened as a bank on 8 August, merely two days
after nuclear attack, and continued in use as a bank until 1992. ft remains in Hiroshima. This beautifully designed and sturdy
reinforced concrete building was designed in 1936 by Nagano Uheiji. Cook’s law: ’’Any man called Godwin who claims it is immoral
to learn the lessons from the results of Nazi racist eugenics pseudoscience and to apply those lessons to those terrible media
dominating celebrity-taboo-lovers who appease, cover-up, or defend the continuation of an evil, irrational pseudoscience which is
causing unnecessary suffering today, is defending injustice, inhumanity and irrational consensus evil and is not behaving as a humane,
objective, person. We need to ensure that the worst mistakes of the past are never repeated, if we are just, moral and caring towards
our fellow human beings who do not deserve to be fed lies and dangerously complacent one-sided, biased propaganda based on a
populist love of obsolete dogma, and/or a hatred of the search for objective fact, by pseudo-educationalists who prefer to live in
utopia than in the real world of their fellow folk!”

https://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/news-jeremy-corbyn-anti-jew-anti.html

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "NV 0110837 FALLOUT STUDIES IN OPERATION REDWING"

See other formats